MINUTES OF A WORKSHOP

CITY COUNCIL, VENICE, FLORIDA

May 12, 2009

A Workshop of the City Council to consider the Airport was held this date at in Council Chambers at City Hall. Mayor Martin called the workshop to order at 9:02 a.m.

ELECTED OFFICIALS AND OTHERS PRESENT

Roll was called with the following elected officials present: Mayor Ed Martin, Vice Mayor Sue Lang, and Council Members John K. Moore, John Simmonds, Vicki Noren Taylor and Ernie Zavodnyik. Kit McKeon was absent.

Also present: City Manager Isaac Turner, City Attorney Robert Anderson, City Clerk Lori Stelzer, Recording Secretary Susan Schult, and for certain items on the agenda: Airport Director Fred Watts and Lisa Mastropieri and Dennis Yap of DY Consultants.

I. WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS

Mr. Watts welcomed everyone, stated this is the second workshop on the Master Plan update, the focus of this workshop is to collect public input, all comments will be documented, and introduced DY Consultants Lisa Mastropieri, Dennis Yap, Angelique Costa and Bill DeGraaff.

II. WORKSHOP PURPOSE

1. Study Process and Schedule

Mr. Yap gave a brief professional biography on the DY team and explained the workshop overview as working toward the establishment of city goals and objectives to shape the framework of the study. He described the planning process of the study that focuses on constructive discussions regarding the future of the airport with no preconceived intentions and developing a vision for the airport by providing a framework for decision making. The goals are to provide an objective analysis of alternative visions and to assist the decision makers toward developing a vision that is satisfactory to all.

Mr. Yap stated this project is not funded by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and is not considered a master plan, the study does not follow the FAA standards for master planning, and the intent is to provide a document that summarizes the analysis and evaluation of three potential visions for the airport.

He reviewed the challenges facing the airport and the community, such as lack of perceived sensitivity to the community and vision for the master plan, the traditional FAA planning process not working, and the absence of a current master plan.

Ms. Mastropieri reviewed the study process and schedule, stating the process is currently in the baseline analysis phase and the general vision and goal should be published by the end of July. She explained the vision plans that should be completed by the end of September, and that the final plan should be complete in January of 2010.

2. Counting Sensors

Ms. Mastropieri talked about the airport operations sensors and explained how the sensors work, how the data is transmitted and sorted, and stated the sensors are solar powered and work at night with infrared technology. She stated touch and go activity is being captured in a separate database, the database capturing the operations is linked with the Flight Aware database, displayed photos of AI, BI, CI and CII aircraft taken at the airport, reviewed preliminary data for March 2009, and noted the majority of airport traffic is AI airplanes with one percent of air traffic occurring at night. She mentioned the public concerns on the counts and types of aircraft using the airport, reviewed the FAA definition of critical aircraft, stated design standards are based on critical aircraft, the data will be compared to FAA and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) forecasts, touched on current economic conditions, and the amount of business and recreation activity at the airport.

III. SUMMARY – MARCH 10, 2009 WORKSHOP

Ms. Mastropieri reviewed the workshop discussion and the vision for the future, and displayed an aerial map showing proposed Fixed Base Operator (FBO) and hangar locations.

IV. KNOWN ISSUES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY

Ms. Mastropieri outlined issues in the community including the lack of trust, FAA/FDOT relations, the environment, security, flight schools, safety concerns, airport leases, land use, airport growth and airspace.

V. ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS

Mr. Yap reviewed potential general visions and alternatives including minimizing community impacts regardless of aviation traffic, and complying with standards for existing and forecasted traffic. He talked about the alternatives selected for further study including environmental concerns, residential neighbors, runways, operations management and airport facilities, and touched on how these concerns would be developed and evaluated.

VI. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION

(940) Alex Clemens, 343 Shore Road, stated he purchased his home two years ago and was unaware of the runway protection zone. He displayed photos of the Venice Airport and the Stuart Airport, and stated the housing area around the Stuart Airport is now a ghost town with no trespassing signs.

Donne Haines, 713 Cadiz Road, talked about the threat of more jet airplanes at the airport and urged council to preserve the golf course.

Mr. Simmonds noted council has no intention of eliminating the golf course.

(9:45) Chuck Schmieler, 125 Castile Street, stated he will provide additional information presented today to DY Consultants. He reported he researched the deed history on current property owners from San Marco Drive to the airport to determine how the property changed hands from the government to private ownership. He presented a series of documents, including Airport Layout Plan (ALP) from 1962 and 1967. He pointed to the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) and runway capacities, the approach end of runway 13/31, noted letters from the FAA in 1967 regarding these zones, the weight bearing for both runways, talked about the general data and service class, and stated these documents were retrieved from the city archives. Mr. Schmieler left the documents for the consultants and suggested the city should mount a permanent public information effort.

Discussion followed regarding the 1967 and 1975 ALPs, existing ALP having the same clearance zones shown on all ALPs, the scrivener’s error on the 2000 ALP and the FAA being aware of it, and the airport being designed as a military base.

(9:56) Walter Hake, 682 Pond Willow, suggested the city look into right hand traffic on runway 4, talked about the number of touch and gos from the traffic school, and displayed an aerial photo of the airport illustrating the right hand turn from runway 4. He touched on the notice that runway 4/22 is in poor condition stating the composition of the runway has not changed in ten years.

Discussion followed regarding the signage and condition of runway 4/22, and properly addressing safety needs.

(10:02) Pat McDonald, 250 Santa Maria, expressed her support for the golf course, stated the golf course allows for native species to thrive, touched on non-profit events held at the golf course, and helicopter traffic.

Josepa Altier, 513 Shore Road, spoke about his vision of keeping the airport small and spoke against the need to expand the airport due to the Sarasota-Bradenton Airport.

Rosemary Vauzanges, 536 Riviera, complimented Ms. Mastropieri on her presentation, talked about myths in the paper stating there is no plot to move the airport, that most people do not want more jets at the airport, and stated the airport will not bring revenue to the city.

Janet Sarty, 827 Harbor Drive South, stated she has lived in Venice 48 years, spoke in support of keeping the airport the way it is, and noted people do not have to live near the airport if they do not want to.

Nick Carlucci, 1335 Horizon Road, President of Venice Aviation Society, Inc. (VASI), thanked the mayor for speaking at the last VASI meeting, and thanked council for their support of the FAA Wings safety program. He stated no one wants to expand the airport, it can not expand physically, proposed the city add a grass runway to be parallel to runway 4/22, and described the uses of this grass strip for smaller aircraft and daytime flights only. He talked about visual difficulty in low wing and high wing aircraft, stated the grass runway would reduce noise and promote safety, and would be small plane friendly.

Mr. Carlucci answered questions regarding the position of the turf runway.

(10:25) Emilio Carlesimo, 700 Golden Beach Boulevard, gave a brief personal history and queried DY Consultants on the study adhering to FAA regulations. He stated he and his wife were aware of the airport when they purchased their home in 1978, stated the airport is a point of interest, asked council to consider the benefits of the airport, specifically the ability to handle emergency aircraft during a catastrophic event, and stated he has no problem with the airport.

Chris Davis, 340 Shore Road, stated she lives in the RPZ zone, expressed her appreciation for council not approving the last proposed master update plan, talked about the 2000 plan and references to CII airplane use, and stated her support for a BII designation and keeping safety areas on airport property. She reported her house was built in 1955, and that she researched the deed finding no mention of the airport encroachment of the land. She complained about the jet fumes from the airport and suggested airport information be accessible to the public on the city website.

Discussion followed regarding the research of Ms. Davis’ title not disclosing the property being in an RPZ, the existing ALP showing the RPZ entirely on airport property, the 2000 ALP not being clear on the airport designation, jet fumes reaching Ms. Davis’ business on Base Avenue, and future landscape plans for Airport Avenue.

(10:40) Claudia Eaton, 416 Shore Road, stated she purchased her house four years ago, appreciates the old town feel of Venice, enjoys the airport, expressed her concern regarding airport issues within the city, encouraged council to give people security in purchasing near the airport, and acknowledged the need for the airport to accept emergency aircraft.

Mayor Martin noted the goal of this process is to come to an amiable conclusion by taking in all the considerations from the community.

(10:46) Jim Marble, 832 Robert Street, talked about having a general vision for the airport, recounted his involvement in the process, queried council on where they want this study to go, and stated even though the airport meets the CII criteria, it does not mean the airport has to be designated as a CII airport. He asked why the airport needs to be changed, noted needed repairs, and that the airport does not need to be enlarged. He mentioned C and D aircraft and the need to define which C aircraft can safely use the airport.

Discussion followed regarding the confusion in the airport designation as a B or C airport and possible options in determining the designation.

(10:54) John Ryan, Venice Area Chamber of Commerce President, stated no one is advocating the expansion of the airport or that the airport should be like the Sarasota-Bradenton Airport, expressed his appreciation for people not wanting to close the airport, stated he grew up in Venice close to the airport, and noted many citizens have a connection to the airport. He stated the airport is a part of Venice and any growth should be designed to maintain the airport.

Discussion followed regarding criticisms of the second study and the necessity for the second study.

Bill DeGraaff, DY Consultants, stated he likes the community and may settle here, he applauded the community involvement today, stated the importance of this meeting, the value of the golf course to the community, and the value of the 1967 ALP that was submitted.

VII. NEXT STEPS

Discussion ensued regarding a May 4, 2009 letter from the Atlanta FAA office regarding an upcoming visit from FAA on May 20, 2009, having the mayor, city manager, airport director and DY consultants available to meet with FAA, the city manager having an introductory meeting with FAA in Orlando on May 13, 2009, the purpose of the two FAA meetings, number of airport operations in the month of March, the touch and go activity not included in the March operation totals, the community vision for the airport, runway protection zones, critical count of airport operations, agreeing to meet the standards represented by the operation count, complying with the FAA requirements, keeping the RPZ on airport property, criteria for the RPZ, and having no accidents in the RPZ.

Mr. Yap noted the two prevalent issues are how to design the airport and whether the city will restrict certain aircraft.

VIII. ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business to come before council, the workshop was adjourned at 11:24 a.m.

ATTEST: Mayor – City of Venice

City Clerk